Lithium Ion batteries again

[RogerL]

Euro NCAP tests are nowhere near 65mph even for a single vehicle crash, never mind two vehicles each closing at 65mph. The full frontal is at 50km per hour with side impact at a lower speed.

Euro NCAP - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The NCAP test crashes a single car into a massive concrete block - at 50 kph (31 mph) this is equivalent to a head-on crash between two cars with a closing speed of 62 mph - double the speed of the individual cars.

I doubt that NCAP has ever set test speeds in mph - but British journalists tend to convert to mph.

 

[Buckman]

The NCAP test crashes a single car into a massive concrete block - at 50 kph (31 mph) this is equivalent to a head-on crash between two cars with a closing speed of 62 mph - double the speed of the individual cars.

I doubt that NCAP has ever set test speeds in mph - but British journalists tend to convert to mph.

It took me a few years to get used to switching from km to miles. One of the reasons why I picked up a speeding fine. Same applies to daughter who also got down for speeding.

Many new cars tend to use ltrs per 100km which is much easier to use and understand than mph. Not sure why the UK still persists in using miles instead of kilometres. In hindsight, I probably should have put 65kph.

However my post was not about speed etc but about the weight of new cars. Unfortunately someone chose to focus on my speed error rather than the weight of cars.

 

[otherclive]

It took me a few years to get used to switching from km to miles. One of the reasons why I picked up a speeding fine. Same applies to daughter who also got down for speeding.

Many new cars tend to use ltrs per 100km which is much easier to use and understand than mph. Not sure why the UK still persists in using miles instead of kilometres. In hindsight, I probably should have put 65kph.

However my post was not about speed etc but about the weight of new cars. Unfortunately someone chose to focus on my speed error rather than the weight of cars.

I now see where your 65 mph came from. If the NCAP full frontal speed test is 50kph into a solid concrete mass then as Roger says that is equivalent to two cars head on at a closing speed of 100 kmhr. Which is near enough to 65 mph. Query solved.

 

[RogerL]

It took me a few years to get used to switching from km to miles. One of the reasons why I picked up a speeding fine. Same applies to daughter who also got down for speeding.

Many new cars tend to use ltrs per 100km which is much easier to use and understand than mph. Not sure why the UK still persists in using miles instead of kilometres. In hindsight, I probably should have put 65kph.

However my post was not about speed etc but about the weight of new cars. Unfortunately someone chose to focus on my speed error rather than the weight of cars.

If we had to go fully metric, I'd prefer km/litre rather than litres/100km - apologies for further thread drift.

 

[Buckman]

If we had to go fully metric, I'd prefer km/litre rather than litres/100km - apologies for further thread drift.

You are correct and probably got mixed up again. However most newer cars allow you to choose which option.

 

[Tobes]

It took me a few years to get used to switching from km to miles. One of the reasons why I picked up a speeding fine. Same applies to daughter who also got down for speeding.

Many new cars tend to use ltrs per 100km which is much easier to use and understand than mph. Not sure why the UK still persists in using miles instead of kilometres. In hindsight, I probably should have put 65kph.

However my post was not about speed etc but about the weight of new cars. Unfortunately someone chose to focus on my speed error rather than the weight of cars.

Though as we have seen, weight makes little of no difference to NCAP, and batteries make little or no difference to absolute weight.
What makes a difference to weight is the size and shape of the car, the planned use for it, and - ultimately - the buyers choice. I.e. if a prospective buyer wishes to have less impact on the road surface(and all sort of other environmental factors), choose a lighter vehicle.

 

[Buckman]

Though as we have seen, weight makes little of no difference to NCAP, and batteries make little or no difference to absolute weight.
What makes a difference to weight is the size and shape of the car, the planned use for it, and - ultimately - the buyers choice. I.e. if a prospective buyer wishes to have less impact on the road surface(and all sort of other environmental factors), choose a lighter vehicle.

I think the weight fo batteries makes massive difference. Perhaps you can why a plain ICE can do about the same mph as the identical one that is a hybrid.

Not quite same, but our Jeep was a 3ltr and weighed over 2200kgs. Our SIL has a 2022 Honda CRV. Our 2018 Jeep gave us about 30mpg yet the Honda was lucky to achieve 38mpg and it is a lot lighter and more modern.. Our current car is about 38mpg.

The Honda and the Lexus are hauling around a great big heavy dirty batteries and the mpg is penalised. If they did not have the battery I suspect that mpg will be about the same or maybe better. The reason why they currently do 38mpg is because the battery kicks in giving inflated readings for mpg. Hence my other thread.

 

[Dustydog]

I may be wrong but I thought a pure Hybrid, non plug in was to allow entry foc to clean air zones.
That may have been some years ago with the advances in clean ICE technology ad blue etc most are now also foc in clean air zones.

 

[GUMPY]

I don't know about advances in technology but our 22 year old RAV4 is ULEZ compliant for all cities in the UK.
It's not the cleanest car in the world in more ways than one.
Even the Z3 at 28 years old is exempt in some of the clean air zones but not London, Bristol or Brum

 

[RogerL]

I may be wrong but I thought a pure Hybrid, non plug in was to allow entry foc to clean air zones.
That may have been some years ago with the advances in clean ICE technology ad blue etc most are now also foc in clean air zones.

??? Euro 6 diesels are allowed into clean air zones without penalty

 

[Sam Vimes]

I'm not familiar with how the NCAP ratings are derived but in terms of the potential damage and injuries from a collision the weight is a very important factor.

It's to do with with the transfer of energy from the vehicle to what ever it hits and this is proportional to the Mass and the square of the velocity.

Mass is not specifically related to shape or size but the Mass of materials used to construct the vehicle plus it's payload.

Vehicles of similar dimensions can have different Masses.....one may use light weight composite materials in the body work and others various thicknessess of metal.

Also comparing MPG and assuming that the weight is reducing it is not necessarily true because different engines can have differing efficiencies.

 

[Tobes]

I think the weight fo batteries makes massive difference. Perhaps you can why a plain ICE can do about the same mph as the identical one that is a hybrid.

Not quite same, but our Jeep was a 3ltr and weighed over 2200kgs. Our SIL has a 2022 Honda CRV. Our 2018 Jeep gave us about 30mpg yet the Honda was lucky to achieve 38mpg and it is a lot lighter and more modern.. Our current car is about 38mpg.

The Honda and the Lexus are hauling around a great big heavy dirty batteries and the mpg is penalised. If they did not have the battery I suspect that mpg will be about the same or maybe better. The reason why they currently do 38mpg is because the battery kicks in giving inflated readings for mpg. Hence my other thread.

I was referring to the weight of the car regarding NCAP, which was the issue you raised with the Polestar being bad for pedestrians. As you say, there was thread drift from weight with regards to safety, to speed with regards to safety, and then on to batteries for economy.

On the weight vs safety, we can see that there is little or no correlation in the eyes of NCAP.
We can also see there is no correlation between weight and drive train when examining the wide spectrum of vehicles available, it's more related to body shape and absolute size.

On the subject of economy:

Small hybrid batteries are only useful in low speed start stop city traffic. Their entire point is to capture unwanted kinetic energy when slowing down, and allow it to be reused to accelerate again. At constant speed over long distances, hybrid engines have almost no benefit to non-hybrid, and as you say, can be less efficient if the benefit of start - stop is lost due to loss of economy based on extra weight via rolling resistance.

However, what can be seen is that electric drive trains (the electric motor and battery) are dramatically more efficient that combustion drive trains. Adding a larger battery and external charging source (PHEV) allows the majority of the journey to be covered in electric mode, and the result is the perceived economy goes up markedly to 80mpg or maybe over 100mpg.

The logical extent of this is to rely purely on the battery for journeys, and remove the combustion element of the car, resulting in a BEV, the most efficient solution we have available today, returning efficiency equivalents of in excess of 150mpg.

 

[Tobes]

I'm not familiar with how the NCAP ratings are derived but in terms of the potential damage and injuries from a collision the weight is a very important factor.

It's to do with with the transfer of energy from the vehicle to what ever it hits and this is proportional to the Mass and the square of the velocity.

Mass is not specifically related to shape or size but the Mass of materials used to construct the vehicle plus it's payload.

Vehicles of similar dimensions can have different Masses.....one may use light weight composite materials in the body work and others various thicknessess of metal.

Also comparing MPG and assuming that the weight is reducing it is not necessarily true because different engines can have differing efficiencies.

NCAP ratings for vulnerable road users have moved on. They now measure the collision avoidance mechanisms and take that into account as much as the protection offered to cyclists, pedestrians and the like during an actual collision. If you look at post #66 there are NCAP results for 3 different cars with 2 distinct weights. The lightest of the three has the lowest score for vulnerable users. This is in part down to the available avoidance systems.

 

[Sam Vimes]

A debate with many twists and turns and can go on for ever...which is fine....so...

Giving an EV an equivalent Mpg is interesting but if you can only put the equivalent of 2 gallons in your EV, it doesn't get you very far.😉

 

[otherclive]

I think the weight fo batteries makes massive difference. Perhaps you can why a plain ICE can do about the same mph as the identical one that is a hybrid.

Not quite same, but our Jeep was a 3ltr and weighed over 2200kgs. Our SIL has a 2022 Honda CRV. Our 2018 Jeep gave us about 30mpg yet the Honda was lucky to achieve 38mpg and it is a lot lighter and more modern.. Our current car is about 38mpg.

The Honda and the Lexus are hauling around a great big heavy dirty batteries and the mpg is penalised. If they did not have the battery I suspect that mpg will be about the same or maybe better. The reason why they currently do 38mpg is because the battery kicks in giving inflated readings for mpg. Hence my other thread.

Come on now the Lexus hybrid battery in yours is the same as mine and no way could it be described as big heavy and dirty. Why “ dirt”. But if it was a PHEV or EV obviously their batteries would be heavier. Also I cannot understand why you think the readings of fuel consumption are “ inflated” when battery kicks in. Surely the whole purpose of buying a hybrid or PHEV is to achieve improved fuel consumption isn’t it? If it didn’t do that then there’s not any purpose in ownership.

 

[otherclive]

I'm not familiar with how the NCAP ratings are derived but in terms of the potential damage and injuries from a collision the weight is a very important factor.

It's to do with with the transfer of energy from the vehicle to what ever it hits and this is proportional to the Mass and the square of the velocity.

Mass is not specifically related to shape or size but the Mass of materials used to construct the vehicle plus it's payload.

Vehicles of similar dimensions can have different Masses.....one may use light weight composite materials in the body work and others various thicknessess of metal.

Also comparing MPG and assuming that the weight is reducing it is not necessarily true because different engines can have differing efficiencies.

A lot of motorists don’t realise that the NCAP rating for a small car doesn’t necessarily give the same protection as a big car with the same NCAP rating. For example a Picanto going head to head with a E class. Which one would you want to be in?

 

[Dustydog]

??? Euro 6 diesels are allowed into clean air zones without penalty

I did say that may have been some years ago😉

 

[Tobes]

A debate with many twists and turns and can go on for ever...which is fine....so...

Of course
As long as it stay good natured - I am all for the debate!

Giving an EV an equivalent Mpg is interesting but if you can only put the equivalent of 2 gallons in your EV, it doesn't get you very far.😉

That's an interesting point though. 1 Litre of diesel contains around 10kWh of energy. It is an incredibly dense fuel source. My car battery only has 78kWh of space, and 75kWh of that is useable. I.e. my car holds about 7.5 litres of diesel worth of energy. - less than 2 gallons.

However, on our trip away this weekend, it returned the highest efficiency I have ever had in it in 4 years of driving. 119 miles (South Northants to just north of Nantwich) using just 48% of the battery. Thats a theoretical range of 248 miles on a single full charge. It equates to 3.3 miles per kWh, not a hugely impressive score for an EV, but still good.

But when you look at that in diesel terms, it's the equivalent of 3.6l of diesel for 119 miles, or 149MPG.

 

[Tobes]

The Honda and the Lexus are hauling around a great big heavy dirty batteries and the mpg is penalised. If they did not have the battery I suspect that mpg will be about the same or maybe better. The reason why they currently do 38mpg is because the battery kicks in giving inflated readings for mpg. Hence my other thread.

As per the other thread, Unless it's a plug in hybrid, it only has one measurement, MPG over any reasonable period - E.g a tanks worth of fuel.

The economy of a hybrid is very easy to measure. You fill it up, run it to empty and see how far you went. All of the energy input is derived from the fuel - none comes from anywhere else (unless you started at the top of a hill and ended at the bottom). The total efficiency of the car will of course change based on the specific journeys made. One long one at 100mph will be less efficient than one long one at 50mph. And in a hybrid, short journeys with lots of start and stop at up to 30 mph will be more efficient than in a non-hybrid up to 30 mph with lots of start and stop.

 

[Buckman]

Come on now the Lexus hybrid battery in yours is the same as mine and no way could it be described as big heavy and dirty. Why “ dirt”. But if it was a PHEV or EV obviously their batteries would be heavier. Also I cannot understand why you think the readings of fuel consumption are “ inflated” when battery kicks in. Surely the whole purpose of buying a hybrid or PHEV is to achieve improved fuel consumption isn’t it? If it didn’t do that then there’s not any purpose in ownership.

Where do you think they got the minerals from to build the battery? Out of the sky? I am fairly sure the minerals are mined, transported thousands of miles to a manufacturing plant to be made into a battery?

If the car was an ICE vehicle and not carrying the big battery, it would probably achieve the same mpg as the hybrid which has the big battery as the ICE car will be a whole lot lighter?

 

[Tobes]

Where do you think they got the minerals from to build the battery? Out of the sky? I am fairly sure the minerals are mined, transported thousands of miles to a manufacturing plant to be made into a battery?

Like the fossil fuel - every time you fill the tank.

If the car was an ICE vehicle and not carrying the big battery, it would probably achieve the same mpg as the hybrid which has the big battery as the ICE car will be a whole lot lighter?

No - it would not, thats the whole point. For mixed use, a hybrid will out perform an ICE car. A hybrid battery weighs somewhere in the region of up to 50kg (the weight of a Prius battery).

 

[Oscarmax]

Where do you think they got the minerals from to build the battery? Out of the sky? I am fairly sure the minerals are mined, transported thousands of miles to a manufacturing plant to be made into a battery?

If the car was an ICE vehicle and not carrying the big battery, it would probably achieve the same mpg as the hybrid which has the big battery as the ICE car will be a whole lot lighter?

Just look at the advancements in technology the later version of your vehicle with a more advance energy recovery system and a lithium battery is achieving 50+ mpg

 

[otherclive]

This morning at 1000h I drove 7.3 miles of which 57% was electric and with 57.5mpg. Mix of rural A road and urban roads at each end of the route. I cannot think of any of my previous ICE petrol that would have given such mpg. My Nissan Note 1.5 turbo diesel could have done, and our current 1.25 petrol Rio would probably have achieved very near to 50 mpg. But those two cars aren’t comparable to a larger 2.5 litre petrol hybrid, and I’ve not changed my driving habits to pander to the hybrid.

 

[Buckman]

Like the fossil fuel - every time you fill the tank.

Same for any EV!

 

[Sam Vimes]

As the saying goes...mileage may vary.

My round trip this morning of about 40miles on rural roads gave me about 75mpg on the Qashqai 1.5dCi.

Best ever was 90mpg through Glen Coe stuck behind a campervan tootling along at 40mph.

Range can be upto +800 miles.

Pays your money and burns your fuel 😉